Successfully reported this slideshow.
Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Reconsidering Relevance Daniel Tunkelang Chief Scientist, Endeca
howdy! <ul><li>1988 – 1992 </li></ul><ul><li>1993 – 1998 </li></ul><ul><li>1999 - </li></ul>
overview <ul><li>what is relevance? </li></ul><ul><li>what’s wrong with relevance? </li></ul><ul><li>what are the alternat...
iconic businesses of the 20 th  and 21 st  centuries I’m Feeling Lucky

YouTube videos are no longer supported on SlideShare

View original on YouTube

Loading in …3
×

Check these out next

5 of 55 Ad
Advertisement

More Related Content

More from Daniel Tunkelang (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Advertisement

Editor's Notes

  • Friends, Countrymen, Googlers, I come to bury relevance, not to praise it. Well, that’s overstating the case. But I am here today to challenge your approach to information access, and more importantly to tease out and question its philosophical underpinnings. I realize that I’m singling you out as Googlers for holding a belief that is far more widely held, but you are the standard bearers of relevance. And you invited me.  Notes: this presentation was delivered at the Google NYC office on 1/7/09. The title is an allusion to Tefko Saracevic’s article, “Relevance Reconsidered”. If you are interested in learning more about the history of relevance I highly recommend his 2007 Lazerow Memorial Lecture on “Relevance in information science” (http://mediabeast.ites.utk.edu/mediasite4/Viewer/?peid=fb8f84cb-9f82-499f-b12c-9a56ab5cf5ba).

×